PDA

View Full Version : Yoko Ono is the best thing that happened to the beatles



batmanbooyah
07-18-2007, 10:08 PM
And let me tell you why. This is serious too.


Everyone blames her for breaking up the beatles. I say any fan of the beatles should be thanking her. Over the years, great acts either break up due to some sort of death, or they just get old and start to suck. I'm talking about the acts that changed music. Nirvana? Dead. The doors? Dead. Hendrix? Dead. Hootie and the Blowfish? Still around.


The beatles were at their pinacle. so they either had the option of someone dying or getting old and shitty, as can be seen with most of paul mccartney's music.


But out of no where, comes yoko ono, breaking up the band and the "myth" of the beatles is created, but without someone outright dying. Lennon went on to do some great music, ringo....i don't know what he did. harrison had some great songs too. and paul mccartney went and smoked all the weed he could.


see? yoko ono created the legacy of the beatles without someone dying or the beatles going on and making some horribly shitty music. i have no doubt someone like hendrix would have gone on and made some great music, but would he have gotten worn out like elvis? who knows. would he have joined up with macy grey to make the theme to spiderman? I think so.


I rest my case. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS!

Ethan Van Sciver
07-18-2007, 10:10 PM
Er, if they had broken up instantly when Yoko showed up, with her having had no influence whatsoever on Beatles music, and then she and John had retired to obscurity, then MAYBE.

George was the first to introduce an annoying, noisy foreign piece of shit to the Beatles with his Sitar though, so I blame him more than anyone.

Bryan H
07-18-2007, 10:24 PM
I'd have rather seen Fat Vegas Beatles then non-existant Beatles.

nick maynard
07-18-2007, 10:38 PM
this reminds me vaguely of something i read in a comic once... hm... what comic could it have been? hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Jibberwashed
07-19-2007, 01:05 AM
what about the Rolling Stones? Willie Nelson? Ray Charles? Some musicians keep going, and continue to kick ass into their golden year. I think the Beatles had the potential to do the same, but we'll know. At the very least, we can be thankful for the music that we were lucky enough to get while they were together.

Hollingsworth
07-19-2007, 01:35 AM
Comparing Hootie and the Blowfish with the Beatles is fucking retarded.

Sure, their song writing might have gone downhill if they stuck around. But they were *never* as lame as those guys, so comparing them is weird.

sleep
07-19-2007, 01:56 AM
Comparing Hootie and the Blowfish with the Beatles is fucking retarded.
*bing*

SAVETHEB
07-19-2007, 01:59 AM
i havent heard a hootie and the blowfish song since 1996

AAlgar
07-19-2007, 01:59 AM
i havent heard a hootie and the blowfish song since 1996

I don't know that I've ever heard one.

SAVETHEB
07-19-2007, 01:59 AM
what about the Rolling Stones? Willie Nelson? Ray Charles? Some musicians keep going, and continue to kick ass into their golden year. I think the Beatles had the potential to do the same, but we'll know. At the very least, we can be thankful for the music that we were lucky enough to get while they were together.

i woulnt exactly say the rolling stones are kicking ass.......and ray charles?:lol:

Damian696
07-19-2007, 02:02 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9Q80kuHa2Y

dougmac
07-19-2007, 03:44 AM
Plus, Lennon seemed abit too crazy to live a long happy life. he'd probably have turned out to be more politically annoying than Bono

Akira
07-19-2007, 04:14 AM
The reason she's good for the Beatles image is because she's a convient scapegoat so people that love the band don't have to admit it was 3 massivley oversized egos possesed by 3 insufferable prats that really broke up the band. I love their music to death, but John, Paul, and even George towards the end got so full of themselves that they were imploding in slow motion. the "yoko broke up the beatles" myth has allowed them to all come out smelling like roses when the fact of the matter is, it took both George Martin and Ringo threatening to quit because they were tired of dealing with 3 primadonnas to even get through the recording of Abbey Road.

Jim T.
07-19-2007, 04:34 AM
The reason she's good for the Beatles image is because she's a convient scapegoat so people that love the band don't have to admit it was 3 massivley oversized egos possesed by 3 insufferable prats that really broke up the band. I love their music to death, but John, Paul, and even George towards the end got so full of themselves that they were imploding in slow motion. the "yoko broke up the beatles" myth has allowed them to all come out smelling like roses when the fact of the matter is, it took both George Martin and Ringo threatening to quit because they were tired of dealing with 3 primadonnas to even get through the recording of Abbey Road.

Yep. The band was never going to survive the egos. Blaming Yoko is just easy b/c of her incredibly abrasive public personality. I suspect a year or 2 off to make solo albums may have helped things but who knows...

JoeE
07-19-2007, 04:47 AM
John is more to blame for Yoko than Yoko is. Yoko would have been obnoxious no matter what, but John is the one who made sure she was in the room while the band was recording, over the objections of everyone else.

chess
07-19-2007, 05:06 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9Q80kuHa2Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWSZ_iNWJYM

chess
07-19-2007, 05:13 AM
Plus, Lennon seemed abit too crazy to live a long happy life. he'd probably have turned out to be more politically annoying than Bono

...Lennon selling ipods, wearing huge colorful glasses, and jamming with Neil Young and Pearl Jam.

Damn it, he'd probably be hanging out with Chevy Chase, too.

Seriously, if Lennon was alive today (and Harrison), they may have toured like the Eagles to play some of their old songs. I think they would be fun.

DAVE
07-19-2007, 05:29 AM
The reason she's good for the Beatles image is because she's a convient scapegoat so people that love the band don't have to admit it was 3 massivley oversized egos possesed by 3 insufferable prats that really broke up the band. I love their music to death, but John, Paul, and even George towards the end got so full of themselves that they were imploding in slow motion. the "yoko broke up the beatles" myth has allowed them to all come out smelling like roses when the fact of the matter is, it took both George Martin and Ringo threatening to quit because they were tired of dealing with 3 primadonnas to even get through the recording of Abbey Road.


Yep. The band was never going to survive the egos. Blaming Yoko is just easy b/c of her incredibly abrasive public personality. I suspect a year or 2 off to make solo albums may have helped things but who knows...

Exactly, this "better to burn out than fade away theory" is dependent on Yoko breaking up the Beatles in order to be true. The problem is, she didn't break up the Beatles. She was one factor in it, and one factor alone. People judging strictly from the outside of the situation saw that John was with this weird artist lady and blamed her. The truth is, Paul and Linda McCartney, and her father, Lee Eastman and his battle for business control of the group with John Lennon and his manager of choice, Allen Klein were the main factors that went into the break up of the group.
Paul wanted his father in law to manage the group, John wanted Klein. John convinced Ringo and George. Paul never agreed, but publiclly acted so for the sake of unity. He refused to sign a contract though.
John wanted Phil Spector to produce 'Let It Be', Paul wanted to continue working with George Martin. John got his way, with the help of the corporate muscle of Allen Klein. 30 or so years later Paul released 'Let It Be' minus Spector's signature "Wall of Sound" production.

It's amazing how over time assumpsions and gossip become facts. Yoko had less of a role in breaking up the Beatles than Linda did. But Yoko was weird and Asian, and Linda seemed nice and blonde.

mattbrand
07-19-2007, 05:33 AM
The reason she's good for the Beatles image is because she's a convient scapegoat so people that love the band don't have to admit it was 3 massivley oversized egos possesed by 3 insufferable prats that really broke up the band. I love their music to death, but John, Paul, and even George towards the end got so full of themselves that they were imploding in slow motion. the "yoko broke up the beatles" myth has allowed them to all come out smelling like roses when the fact of the matter is, it took both George Martin and Ringo threatening to quit because they were tired of dealing with 3 primadonnas to even get through the recording of Abbey Road.

Very true. And I am a HUGE Beatles fan.

Akira
07-19-2007, 05:36 AM
It's amazing how over time assumpsions and gossip become facts. Yoko had less of a role in breaking up the Beatles than Linda did. But Yoko was weird and Asian, and Linda seemed nice and blonde.
:thumb:
It's sad that people don't want to admit it, but it's true. A lot of the hatred tossed at Yoko has it's basis in racism and prejudice against "weird" artists. If John was dating marianne faithfull and the same thing happened to the band, I bet she wouldn't get any shit.

mattbrand
07-19-2007, 05:38 AM
I do have to say though, that Yoko's awful voice sure doesn't earn her any bonus points at all.

DAVE
07-19-2007, 05:41 AM
:thumb:
It's sad that people don't want to admit it, but it's true. A lot of the hatred tossed at Yoko has it's basis in racism and prejudice against "weird" artists. If John was dating marianne faithfull and the same thing happened to the band, I bet she wouldn't get any shit.

Yeah, at the time people were legitimatly uncomfortable with seeing mixed race couple. Even if it wasn't racism per se, it was discomfort stemming from seeing something unfamilier.
But weird wives of all races get blamed for breaking up bands, even now. Courtney Love, although a nutjob, probably kept Kurt alive longer than he even would've lasted, but nowadays, she killed him. :-?

FredC
07-19-2007, 05:41 AM
Don't know what Ringo did? Pffft.

Might I remind you of Shining Time Station and his wonderful rendition of The Mock Turtle in Alice and Wonderland? :roll:

DaGetHighKnight
07-19-2007, 06:12 AM
No.

JoeE
07-19-2007, 06:14 AM
As someone who actually spent part of his childhood enjoying Shining Time Station, I have to say that ripping on Ringo for doing that show is some of the lamest shit ever. In fact, ripping on Ringo in general is lame.

batmanbooyah
07-19-2007, 06:18 AM
Comparing Hootie and the Blowfish with the Beatles is fucking retarded.


someone doesn't get humor if it punched them in the face and sang "hold my hand" hahaha

mattbrand
07-19-2007, 06:20 AM
someone doesn't get humor if it punched them in the face and sang "hold my hand" hahaha

Yeah, I caught that as humor right away...

Akira
07-19-2007, 06:27 AM
As someone who actually spent part of his childhood enjoying Shining Time Station, I have to say that ripping on Ringo for doing that show is some of the lamest shit ever. In fact, ripping on Ringo in general is lame.

Word

Horizon Drive
07-19-2007, 09:05 AM
I love how people think that John's solo career was good and Paul put out shitty music. John has two excellent solo albums whose songs were written while he was a Beatle (Plastic Ono Band and Imagine) the rest are either barely mediocre (Mind Games, the overated Walls and Bridges, and Double Fantasy) or bad (Sometime in NYC, Rock and Roll). Paul's had a much better solo career and his music is a lot better.

And George's eastern influences on the Beatles were great. Two out of his three indian songs are great (Love You To and Inner Light.)

WillieLee
07-19-2007, 09:13 AM
I love how people think that John's solo career was good and Paul put out shitty music. John has two excellent solo albums whose songs were written while he was a Beatle (Plastic Ono Band and Imagine) the rest are either barely mediocre (Mind Games, the overated Walls and Bridges, and Double Fantasy) or bad (Sometime in NYC, Rock and Roll). Paul's had a much better solo career and his music is a lot better.

And George's eastern influences on the Beatles were great. Two out of his three indian songs are great (Love You To and Inner Light.)

And Paul was smart enough to keep his wife buried in the mix.

Horizon Drive
07-19-2007, 09:16 AM
And Paul was smart enough to keep his wife buried in the mix.


Not on the Wild Life album (ugghhhh)

He didn't lower her enough in the mix on his first couple of albums.

nick maynard
07-19-2007, 09:16 AM
this reminds me vaguely of something i read in a comic once... hm... what comic could it have been? hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

oh right. powers.

Cth
07-19-2007, 09:20 AM
/eagerly awaiting the "smith and wesson was the best thing that happened to nirvana" thread (sorry dunno of any shotgun manufacturers offhand)

WillieLee
07-19-2007, 09:26 AM
/eagerly awaiting the "smith and wesson was the best thing that happened to nirvana" thread (sorry dunno of any shotgun manufacturers offhand)

Remington.

Colby
07-19-2007, 09:34 AM
Given how awesome John and Paul's solo careers were, at least immediately post-Beatles...

And given how wonderfully they complimented each other, to the point that one's weakness was the other's strength...

And given that George also had a very solid solo career...

I'm gonna have to go ahead and disagree. We would've gotten at least one more album of "Let It Be" level quality. The fact that Yoko deprived us of that means the bitch must die.

(Nah, I'm kiddin'. It's not really her fault, John and Paul were just too different to work together for very long.)

Cth
07-19-2007, 09:35 AM
Remington.

Thanks :)